Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

parliament so many different opportunities of considering the tendency of the measure before they finally gave it their concurrence. This caution was therefore exceedingly wise; for nothing required more deliberation than laws enacted for the welfare, protection, and government of the people; and therefore it became their constitutional guardians, their representatives, to be exceedingly cautious of adopting any measure which might tend to preclude them from the free and unlimited exercise of their judgments, on every subject in which the interests of the country were essentially concerned. It was with this view that he meant to submit to them, before he sat down, his motion; for he was clearly of opinion, that the address which the House had lately voted to his majesty was an infringement of the free, unbiassed, and unrestrained exercise of their judgment. After the business had been only four or five days before parliament, and in its second stage, the House had absolutely come to a vote which precluded them from giving any opinion in the subsequent stages through which the treaty was to pass; and thus, whatever their sentiments were, or might be, they could not prove availing. Having pledged themselves to his majesty to take all early and possible means of carrying the said treaty into effect, they were reduced to a very unpleasant dilemma, either to let the treaty pass, however repugnant its principles, or subject themselves to the charge of having given a faithless promise to his majesty. This was of all situations the most to be avoided. It was derogatory to that sacred faith which should be preserved, and that respect which they should entertain in all concerns either of addresses or promises to the sovereign. As to the plea that no necessity existed for adhering to the accustomed parliamentary forms in the present transaction, he could not see any principle in the commercial treaty which could authorise parliament to let it pass with less inquiry and circumspection than even the most ordinary concerns. On the contrary, it was a subject, which, of all others, required the most deliberate investigation. Besides, being a commercial question, it became such a subject that the parliament had thought it expedient even to add two more stages to the investigation than what were adopted on ordinary concerns. The committee of the whole House and the report were added by a resolution of parliament in the year 1772. Thus, not only the invariable custom of ancient times evinced the necessity of giving every possible opportunity for the House to consider most maturely the tendency of any bill in its different stages; but the opinion of modern times had been, that it was necessary to increase the stages of inquiry on a subject of such importance. With regard to himself, he had been censured for repeatedly recurring to one subject. But this was a species of censure

which he should treat with contempt. This was the case in the present instance. He had, during the progress of this business, frequently mentioned the treaty of Utrecht. He should now beg leave to mention that subject again, as it tended to illustrate what he had to propose to the House. Had the ministry of that day voted an address to Queen Anne, and in it induced parliament to pledge themselves to carry the said treaty into effect at the time of its progress through the House, as they had on the present occasion, the consequence must have been the passing of the commercial part of the treaty into a law; for it was only by not doing it that this evil had been avoided. During the first stages of the consideration of that treaty in parliament, there was no material opposition. On the contrary, it passed through the Committee, and was reported by very considerable majorities. But, in the subsequent stages, information was obtained, objections were made, and the majority of parliament very wisely rejected it, as a measure that threatened the whole commercial interest of the country almost with annihilation. Happy, therefore, it was, that the ministry of that day did not bring a motion for an address to his majesty before parliament, when the majorities of the House were so much in favour of the treaty. If they had, the address would certainly have passed, and the country would have been ruined. To this he attributed all the subsequent prosperity and glory we had acquired. To the rejection of the commercial part of the treaty that great queen owed her highest honours, if not her regal dignities.

Mr. Fox now adverted to the manner in which the bill for carrying the treaty into effect had been connected with that for the consolidation of the customs. This, he observed, had likewise a close relation to the subject on which he had been troubling the House. By this vote of address, the Lords in the other House would not have an opportunity of exercising their judgments in the passing of the bill to which he alluded. Besides, as it was connected with the consolidation of the customs, they were even precluded, by this means, of exercising the only right they had-with respect to a money bill

of adopting or rejecting it. If they were disposed to reject the consolidation bill, they could not, as it was connected with a subject they had pledged themselves to carry into effect. And if they were disposed to alter any parts of the commercial treaty, with regard to any matter in their power, they could not, as it formed part of a money bill; and thus was the exercise of their lordships' rights fettered by the address, and by uniting these two subjects. This address, too, would entirely prevent the House from adopting any system that might here

after be settled with respect to Portugal, if such system deviated from that established in the treaty with France. We had, therefore, not only deprived ourselves of the privilege of exercising our opinions and discretion, with regard to the treaty itself; but we had likewise deprived ourselves of the privilege of exercising any opinion or decision on pending treaties with foreign powers, if they did not happen perfectly to coincide with the one negotiated with France.

Mr. Fox now made some observations on the manner in which the court of France had depended on the ratification of this treaty. They had stated in the convention-❝ as soon as it had received the sanction of the law." But to receive this sanction of the law, it must be submitted to all those forms and investigations which constituted our laws. And as the address prevented this possibility, the treaty could not be said to have the sanction of the law. How, then, could the French court expect it to be ratified? He consequently thought that the address had absolutely destroyed the legal possibility of the treaty being so carried into effect as to admit of a ratification. To have the sanction of our laws, as he before observed, it was necessary that it should pass every form of parliament. But if that House was precluded from giving their opinions, whatever forms or stages it might pass through, they could be of no effect with regard to legal efficiency. In this point of view, he thought the address absolutely destructive of the intention for which it was professedly moved that of carrying the subject as immediately into ef fect as possible. For nothing could have the efficiency of law that was not properly submitted to those forms which the constitution prescribed for the making of such laws.

[ocr errors]

Mr. Fox next adverted to the nature of addresses to his majesty. There were two modes in which such addresses were necessary and serviceable. These were with regard to negociation and the prosecution of war. In both these instances, addresses strengthened the effort of Government. But then, they contained no particular pledges. They contained, in general terms, an offer of their lives and properties in support of the measures then prosecuting. But how did such addresses differ from the present? Instead of containing a general disposition or approbation of a treaty being formed with France, it contained a specific assurance that the particulars of the treaty should be carried into effect. What was this but interfering, in the most unconstitutional manner, with the rights of the legislature? What had the House done in agreeing to such an address? They had even given a sacred promise to majesty which it was not in their power to give. No opinion, at least no assurance could be given, that

any measure should be carried into effect while it was depending in parliament. For there was no stage of any bill passing through that House, in which parliament could assure any one that it should pass, until the last stage. Then a decided assurance might be given, and not before.

Thus had parliament, by this address, given his majesty an assurance, which they could not give, consistently with the principles of the constitution. They were likewise so situated, that all future proceedings in this business would be nugatory. They had dispensed with their own privileges; and however inimical they might find it hereafter, they must carry the treaty into effect. They had pledged themselves to their sovereign; and if they did not mean to couch a faithless promise under a solemn assurance to his majesty, they could not recede from their vote. This was the predicament to which they were reduced by this premature proceeding. And in what manner to rescue themselves from either of these alternatives he knew not. But in order to relieve them as far as it was possible from their embarrassing situation, he would offer a protest, or motion, whereby the House would declare they were not bound by any address to the throne from deliberating and acting in its legislative capacity; nor that the subject was in any degree prevented from petitioning the House in consequence of such address. This, he said, would be a declaration of right; and would tend to do away the unconstitutional effects of the address. He accordingly moved, "That no address from this House, to the throne, can in any degree bind or pledge this House, in its legislative capacity, or bar the subjects' right of petitioning this House, upon any bill depending in parliament, although such bill be founded upon, and conformable to such address, previously agreed to by the House."

Mr. Pitt opposed the motion, and moved, in order to negative the whole, to prefix the following words by way of amendment, "That it is necessary to declare that, &c." This amendment being carried, the House divided on the main question so amended:

[blocks in formation]

Tellers.
Mr. Neville

NOES } 113.

Mr. Jolliffe
So it passed in the negative.

[ocr errors]

}

Mr. Steele 188.

ARTICLES OF CHARGE AGAINST MR. HASTINGS.

February 7.

ON N the first day of the session Mr. Burke gave notice that he should renew the proceedings against Mr. Hastings on the 1st of February. That and the following day were spent in examining Mr. Middleton and Sir Elijah Impey; and on Wednesday, the 7th, Mr. Sheridan opened the third charge against Mr. Hastings, viz. the resumption of the jaghires, and the confiscation of the treasures of the princesses of Oude, the mother and grandmother of the reigning nabob. The subject of this charge was peculiarly fitted for displaying all the pathetic powers of eloquence; and never were they displayed with greater skill, force, and elegance, than upon this occasion. For five hours and a half Mr. Sheridan kept the attention of the house (which from the expectation of the day was uncommonly crowded) fascinated by his eloquence; and when he sat down, the whole house, the members, peers, and strangers, involuntarily joined in a tumult of applause, and adopted a mode of expressing their approbation, new and irregular in that house, by loudly and repeatedly clapping with their hands. Mr. Burke declared it to be the most astonishing effort of eloquence, argument, and wit united, of which there is any record or tradition. Sir William Dolben said, that the speech of Mr. Sheridan had stated in so able a manner such a variety of facts and arguments, as entirely to have exhausted the spirits as well as the attention of the Committee; he therefore thought it would be most proper to adjourn the debate. This would give gentlemen time to recruit their spirits, and to collect their exhausted attention. It was now a very late hour. It would be impossible, should they prosecute the business, to come to any vote without adjourning. And indeed, he confessed, that in the present state of his mind it would be impossible for him to give a determinate opinion. Mr. Stanhope said, that when he entered the House, he was not ashamed to acknowledge that his opinion inclined rather to the side of Mr. Hastings; but such had been the wonderful effect of the honourable gentleman's convincing statement of facts, and irresistible eloquence, that he now with as much freedom acknowledged, that he could not say but his sentiments were materially changed. Nothing, indeed, but information almost equal to a miracle, could, he thought, determine him not to vote against the accused: but, however, as he found such had been the effect of what he had heard, he could not by any means then determine to give his vote. He wished to collect his reason, and calmly to consider the truth and justice of what had been stated with such apparent aid of truth, as to render it beyond the power of contradiction.

« ZurückWeiter »